Andrew Coyne: Supreme Court ensures our widely reviled patronage house (the Senate) will stay forever


We are left to conclude by the Supreme Court of Canada ruling that virtually any change to the Senate is impossible without the consent of at least seven and possibly all of the provinces.

The first words of the American constitution are “We the people.” The first words of the Canadian Constitution might as well be “can’t be done.” Because it can’t, and if it ever could the Supreme Court has now seen to it that it won’t.

No other federation is quite so hamstrung, because no other federation has given over the power to amend its constitution quite so holus-bolus to its constituent states. Australians can amend their constitution by referendum, the American constitution provides for state ratifying conventions as an alternative to the legislatures, but in Canada nothing moves unless the premiers nod their heads. And, over a widening swath of the Constitution, that means all of the premiers.

Until now that was limited to what was spelled out in the Constitution’s text. Under Part V, Section 41 of the Constitution Act 1982, a resolution of “the Senate and House of Commons” and of “the legislative assembly of each province” is required for amendments to a short list of items including the office of the Queen, the use of English and French, the “composition of the Supreme Court of Canada” and Part V itself.

The section, note, does not mention the Senate of Canada. On the other hand, Section 42 of the same part specifically mentions the “powers of the Senate” and the “number of members” to which each province is entitled as coming under the general amending formula (seven provinces with 50% of the population). In referring the question to the Supreme Court for its opinion, the federal government had argued this meant the Senate could be abolished under the general amending formula.

Technically this would not run afoul of s. 41, since the Senate’s approval is not actually required to amend the Constitution: Elsewhere it is specified that if the Senate fails to pass such a resolution in 180 days, the Commons has only to repass it to send it on. But even if you don’t buy that: Couldn’t the Senate be effectively done away with, as the government also asked the Court, under s. 42 — that is by “abolishing the powers of the Senate and eliminating the representation of provinces”? Section 42 just says powers and numbers. It doesn’t say which powers or numbers.

Nothing doing, said the Court. Whatever the Constitution might say or not say, such a change would fundamentally alter our “constitutional architecture,” a delicate construct the Supreme Court conjured, as it so often does, out of the air. While s. 42 allows “significant changes to the powers of the Senate and the number of Senators,” it wrote, “it is outside the scope of s. 42 to altogether strip the Senate of its powers and reduce the number of Senators to zero.”

Very well. Suppose Parliament plus seven-and-fifty voted to reduce the Senate’s numbers to one, and its powers to singing the national anthem. Would that leave the Court’s constitutional architecture intact? How far may the powers and numbers of the Senate be diminished, before the Supreme Court declares some Confederation bargain or other has been violated? Who knows? On the evidence, it would appear to depend on the Court’s mood.

This is no idle matter, because on the other questions before it the Court showed the same distressing tendency to freelance. Could Parliament, for example, acting under its Section 44 power to “exclusively” amend “the Senate and House of Commons,” provide for Senators to be appointed only after non-binding consultative elections? Say it again: non-binding — the Governor General (the Prime Minister, really) could still refuse their advice.

Nuh-uh, said the Court. That would amount to a change to the “method of selecting” Senators, and thus come under the general amending formula. That is, it would not change anything in some narrow “textual” sense, but again, there’s “the architecture” to consider. The Fathers of Confederation wanted Senators to be appointed, and therefore weak; make them elected, and they would be strong. To the government’s point that the elections were purely consultative, the Court simply said “my eye.”

"The ‘practical effect,’ to borrow a phrase, is to make Senate reform impossible, and Senate abolition unthinkable"

I paraphrase. In fact what it said was: “Federal legislation providing for the consultative election of Senators would have the practical effect of … endowing them with a popular mandate.” It would give the Senate “democratic legitimacy.” Okay: suppose the consultation were not formalized in legislation. Suppose the prime minister simply followed a policy of appointing senators who had been elected by some process or other. Wouldn’t that imply the same dangerous “legitimacy”? Or suppose he merely consulted widely: how widely could he consult before it damaged the Constitution’s interior decor? Once freed from the confines of what’s actually in the Constitution, these become live issues.

And so on. Parliament can’t impose fixed terms on Senators’ appointments, either, the Court ruled, out of the same concern for the constitutional furniture: unless appointed for life (75, actually, but who’s counting?) their independence would be reduced, thus somehow engaging “the interests of the provinces.” On the other hand, the Court waved through Parliament’s right to eliminate the current wealth and property requirements for Senators (outside Quebec). These were, we must assume, not part of the Senate’s original purpose, to which the Court is otherwise so devoted. Oh? Then why were they put in?

We are left to conclude that virtually any change to the Senate is impossible without the consent of at least seven and possibly all of the provinces. In principle this is to protect the interests of both levels of government, but the “practical effect,” to borrow a phrase, is to make Senate reform impossible, and Senate abolition unthinkable.

And so the status quo — a widely reviled patronage house that, contrary to theories of the self-restraint imposed by its current illegitimacy, has intervened decisively on such trifles as abortion, free trade and global warming — is with us forever. The 1982 Constitution set the lock, and the Supreme Court has just turned the key.

Postmedia News


The Supreme Court of Canada has yet to show any interest in Canada's Third World Third Reich like Gender Superiority Apartheid system enforced by Government and the private "contractors" who enforce Male Sharia Law in Canada.

In Ottawa, we have around A Billion dollars spent in Ottawa alone by the Ottawa Police, and their partners in Crime, The Children's Aid Society of Ottawa in promoting Domestic Violence against fathers with secondary effects of clogging the Family
and Criminal Courts that are Nazi like activities of the Ottawa Crown Attorney's, the Ottawa Police and the collection of Ontario's worst Child Abusers, the Child Protection Workers and their lawyers who spend most of their time promoting hatred towards men.

While we have an Unaccountable Cartel of 54 private corporations who get A Million Dollars for each child made a crown ward, and $266,000 for each child kept in care for a year, its easy to see the Criminal Financial Motivations that drives these Criminal Organizations to pressure their workers to give them want that want;
More business but a cost of destroyed lives.

The Supreme Court of Canada will sooner or later need to deal with the incredible trail of destroyed lives, and abused children left by Ottawa's Pathological Lying - Evidence Fabricating lawyers like MARGUERITE ISOBEL LEWIS who
wait for it, is apparently on a list of lawyers who might become judges.

This lowest form of vile humanity actually fabricates evidence to illegally keep children in care and then to place them, deliberately, knowingly in homes where they know the children WILL be abused.

How can lawyers like Marguerite Isobel Lewis get a way with blatant criminal offenses against the administration of Justice?

That easy, after around 10 years of service with the Corrupt Child Abusing Children's Aid Society's , lawyers get "Annointed" as judges of the Ontario Superior Court , where the likes of the DisHonourable Timothy Minnema, a former CAS lawyer gets to personally fabricate evidence on behalf of the Corrupt Child Abusing Children's Aid Society.

That's why Ontario Parents live in terror at contact with what Ottawa Lawyers call
"The Gestapo".

These professional child abusers earn big bugs. A supervisor earns the same as the Evidence Fabricating Det. Peter Van Der Zander, around $121,000 a year which is around $21,000 more than professional Evidence Fabricator Marguerite Isobel Lewis earns.

That's around Half of the $200,000 that Ontario Pays to Ottawa Crown Attorney Vikii Bair who prosecutes male victims of domestic violence and STAYS charges in the most blatant cases of Obstruction of Justice by, "The BabySnatcher", the nickname that has been given unfairly to Marguerite Isobel Lewis.

Marguerite Isobel Lewis does not "Snatch" Babies from hospitals, that's the job of Child Protection Workers who use the most dubious evidence as a justification to gain yet another child to place "in care" to keep those big bucks rolling in.

Who said Crime does not pay?

If you can fabricate evidence and have a propensity for professional torture and abuse of children and parents, the CAS has a job for you as a Child Protection Worker.


The Senate is an example of corrupt nature of Canadian Society where we have an Oligarchy of power of "Appointed" officials with absolute Power.

Our corrupt elected politicians dictate who will be Senators and Harper chose
Brazeau, Duffy and Harb to fill the seats. Then, engages in fabrications and vilification to throw them off the ship when Harper saw them, rightfully or wrongfully as a liability.

Canada now has a Foundation of Corrupt, Appointed Officials who have turned Canada's Legal System into a Mockery of Justice that is insulting to the intelligence of even the average person.

In Canada around 99% of women get what they want in Family Court. Corrupt Child Protection Agencies like the Ontario Children's Aid Societies get what they ask for 99% of the time and most of that time it is directed against fathers.

It's now normal for even Ontario Superior Court Judges to become Judges after spending a stint of time with the Corrupt Evidence Fabricating Children's Aid Societies and then go on to Fabricating Evidence as a judge and or Rubber Stamping, "decisions" of the Children's Aid Society , when the Courts only supposed to have the power to make "Decisions".

Now Judges of the Ontario Superior Court increasingly dispense with trials claiming the Children's Aid Society's made a decision which most of the time is based on their fabrication of evidence.

When the officials in Power are no longer elected by the people and have absolute power, that power is guaranteed to be abused.

The Senate is just a symptom of how Canada now has a worse than Third World Justice System that at the end of of the day is becoming more and more like that of the Third Reich.

ottawa mens centre

Check out blakout dot ca




History's worst dictators also "appointed" officials who engaged mass murder and while Canada carries on a "Charade" or a "Pretense" of justice, the reality is we have an Oligarchy of a relatively few people in Canada who Rob the poor average Canadian to keep the highest paid in society in their positions of Absolute Power by abusing their absolute Power absolutely.

Lets take a look at those who are Canada's worst perpetrators of Crimes Against Humanity.

At the top, our political parties have selected judges who became judges after paying their way to be selected with "donations" and or unwritten agreements to do the bidding of the government. That continues today.

Provincial Governments like Ontario appoint Prosecutors,  contract out Legal Aid which is then used to deny legal aid to anyone and everyone the Government appointed prosecutors / authorities wish to throw in jail for pointing out the corrupt nature of Canada's "authorities".

Ontario pays Billions of Dollars to operate the Ontario Secret Police, called the Children's Aid Society of Ontario who lawyers openly refer to as "The Gestapo".

Ontario appoints Judges who are Rubber Stamps of "The Gestapo".

The Gestapo employ supervisors who in the case of the London Middlesex CAS removed hundreds of pages of Children's Disclosures of Abuse to prevent any change in their own corrupt crimes against humanity.

In Ottawa, The Children's Aid Society of Ottawa, employ a Supervisor Robert Godman who similarly "supervisors" workers who happen to "fabricate evidence" to HIDE children's disclosures of  abuse by mothers.

Across Ontario, their supervised access rooms are generally filled with Father's, most of whom are male victims of domestic violence by women who were and are, encouraged to be violent towards fathers and, to make false allegations of sexual abuse of children.

There are several things worse than childhood sexual abusers, and that is those who make unfounded  false allegations.

Then even worse, are the "Child Protection Workers"  like Phil Hiltz-Laforge and Claudette Knuckel-Dougan who fabricate evidence and fail to disclose information that proves that they deliberately place children in the homes of violent mothers to promote their own agenda or promoting violence against fathers.

You see, Father and or heterosexual relationships appear to be "Evil" in the view of what Ontario lawyers call "The Gestapo", the terror organization called "The Children's Aid Society of Ontario.

If you want to see Evil, attend at the Ottawa Superior Court  at 161 Elgin Street Ottawa where you will find CAS Lawyer Marguerite Isobel Lewis personally Fabricating Evidence to abuse children.

As you walk the ground floor of the Ottawa Court House, you will repeatedly pass groups of lawyers all talking about "Marguerite Isobel Lewis".

The tragedy is, most of the Judges in Ottawa are CAS Rubber Stamps and in what appears to be an escalating problem, Ottawa Judges like Justice Timothy Minnerma personally  fabricate evidence to assist the CAS and then, when faced with incontrovertible evidence of Fabrications of Evidence by CAS lawyers like,
Marguerite Isobel Lewis, CAS workers such as Phil Hiltz-Laforge and Claudette Knuckle simply attempt to sweep the matter under the Judicial carpet.

Such is the general corrupt nature of our Ottawa Judiciary who turn blind eyes to the worst Criminal Offenses against Children to support the absolute power of
Ottawa's Criminal Organization called
The Children's Aid Society of Ottawa.

check out